Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="embee" data-source="post: 8188263" data-attributes="member: 7026827">On the other hand, with DDB being done through licensing, WOTC doesn't have to worry about the logistics and infrastructure. They tried to roll their own with 4e and couldn't get it to work. It's just not in their wheelhouse.What is in their wheelhouse is licensing. That's their bread and butter. When you say that putting out a VTT isn't all that hard because it's just a fancy website, it's kind of like saying that putting a man on the moon isn't that hard because all you have to do is stick a guy in a rocket and aim it at the moon. The trick is building a fancy website that actually works. Like I said, WOTC is in the licensing business, not the website business.So, someone else does the heavy lifting. All WOTC needs to worry about is the Accounts Receivable. Think how it works now:Player goes to Target. Sees the Starter Kit for $15 and picks it up. Likes it. WOTC gets money from the sale. Player goes onto Amazon and orders the the PHB. WOTC gets money from the sale. Player decides to try online play and signs up for Roll20. Buys some content on Roll20. WOTC gets money from the licenses. Player decides that, you know, FGU is getting a lot of good of mouth for the automation. Player buys FGU and content on FGU, which, even though s/he's buying the same content again, doesn't feel so bad because FGU has cheaper prices. WOTC gets money from the licenses. Foundry sounds good. And it has DDB integration. Player signs up for DDB and buys content on DDB. WOTC gets money from the licenses.Sure. WOTC could develop their own platform. But they don't even know where to begin. Roll20 is the 800 lb gorilla in the VTT market and does a decent enough job. But it's far from perfect. And it's the dominant player. The other leading contender - the Mac to Roll20's PC - is FG and it too has trouble rolling out basic features. In order for WOTC to put out their own VTT, they have to win over Roll20 folks. And not just them. Also the FG and Foundry users. Keep in mind - these three have been fighting over the same group of users for years and their biggest hurdle is user investment. There's only so many times that you can keep selling the same content. If WOTC put out its own VTT tomorrow, would you sign up? Would you abandon your current campaign, your current content, your current knowledge of the platform, and then actively convince your players to go along too? Because that's the hurdle. That's why people dig in with their VTT of choice. Because they're invested in it.   And let's say that WOTC does get over that hurdle. When you listen to a lot of VTT users, many say that they'll go back to in-person play as soon as possible. So that means that VTT goes back to being the alternate method of play with in-person (and paper books) being the default. Which begs the question of why WOTC should plow a bunch of capital into an already niche market to lock down the also-ran when they can let VTTs fight each other with their own money and passively collect revenue from all of them.</blockquote>

Verification